753
why not the centre? (quokk.au)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/mop
92 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 9 months ago (11 children)

"Come on, guys, sacrificing some people in our society so we can have rich people is better than sacrificing alot of people in our society so we can have filthy stinking rich people!"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    “Come on, guys, sacrificing some people in our society so we can have rich people is better than sacrificing alot of people in our society so we can have filthy stinking rich people!”

    You got it backwards.

    It's: "come on, guys, people are afraid of big sweeping changes, so - since filthy stinking rich people control the narrative - it's better to make changes where some people will be sacrificed for the rich, than sacrificing all people for the rich".

    And your reply is the perfect example of a leftists who values purity over harm reduction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    You're NOT reducing harm, you're steadily increasing harm when most of our problems could be easily solved by ending harm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    You're acting like Barn Raising is new or radical. Ya didn't use to need to go into a lifetime of debt so bankers could live in luxury, the whole village would pitch in, get together and build a house for you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago*

    OK, please elaborate on how having some but not all people get out of the shit-hole is not reducing harm. Oh, wait, it's not even "not reducing harm", it's "steadily increasing harm"!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    people are afraid of big sweeping changes

    Who? Who are these people?

    I'm pretty sure you just mean rich people are afraid of any progress - especially because progress is a direct threat to their privilege.

    No normal person is afraid of getting their basic human needs. I think the complete opposite is the case. People are afraid of the extreme deprivation which is a foundation for capitalism.

    harm reduction

    You keep using this term without any evidence of it existing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Who? Who are these people?

    Around 90% of the population of this planet.

    I’m pretty sure you just mean rich people are afraid of any progress

    No.

    No normal person is afraid of getting their basic human needs

    That's false - a lot of people think that them getting their basic human needs would collapse something and cause irreparable damage. It's bullshit, of course, but people - in general - are just by default afraid of change.

    People are afraid of the extreme deprivation which is a foundation for capitalism

    That's absolutely false. I mean, come on, look around. If that were true, we wouldn't have a resurgence of right-wing, liberal capitalism parties all across the board, and the US wouldn't be what it is!

    You keep using this term without any evidence of it existing.

    I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Could you elaborate?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    It's almost like the trolley problem was created to wrestle with the horrible choices life sometimes puts in front of us, instead of just giving us something to talk about in philosophy class.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    The trolley problem typically illustrates how easy the choice is. Like in this case: Sacrifice no people so elites can live in luxury, sacrifice some people so elites can live in luxury, or sacrifice alot of people so elites can live in greater luxury. The obvious answer is sacrifice no people because elites living in luxury is of no benefit to anyone but the elites and if they didn't live in luxury they would still get their needs met.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent